2 AWARD This is a Ministerial reference to the Industrial Court under section 20(3) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 made on 22 nd February 2006 for an award in respect of the dismissal of Mariana binti Hassan ( the Claimant ) by British American Tobacco (Malaysia) Berhad ( the Company ). 2. Introduction The Claimant commenced employment with the Company on 1 st April 1990 as a Data Entry Operator. The Claimant was attached to the Helpdesk services. In 2001, the Company decided to outsource its Helpdesk services and as such offered a Voluntary Separation Scheme (VSS) to her. On 22 nd February 2001, the Employee Relations Manager, Amran Che Ros (COW1) called the Claimant to the IT meeting room. In the room, she was given three documents namely the Voluntary Separation Scheme, Employment Separation Scheme and a 3 months job contract. She was informed that her job at the Helpdesk was made redundant. She was advised to resign her job by accepting the VSS offer and that if she refused to do so, she would be terminated with no compensation and would not be given an offer to work for another (3) months. She said that due to the pressure applied by the Company, she opted for the VSS. The Company, on the other hand, contended that in early 2001, pursuant to a restructuring exercise, it had decided to outsource the Helpdesk services. Accordingly, all the employees employed in the Helpdesk functions including the 2

3 Claimant became surplus to the Company s operational requirement. As such, the Company offered a Voluntary Separation Scheme to all the employees in the Helpdesk, including the Claimant, who was holding the position of Helpdesk operator. The Company contended that the Claimant accepted the VSS on 22 nd February 2001 and as such her employment was mutually brought to an end. Hence, where as in the instant case, the Company denies that the workman had been dismissed and alleges that it was the workman who had voluntarily resigned by accepting of the VSS, then the Industrial Court has the duty to decide first of all as a preliminary issue whether there was a dismissal. Once it has been established that there was a dismissal, then the Court has to decide whether or not the Company had just cause or excuse for dismissing the workman. 3. Whether there was a dismissal? In the instant case, the issue is whether there was a mutual termination of employment by the parties. The collateral issue that arises for decision is whether the Claimant had voluntarily agreed to the said mutual termination. If the Court finds that the termination of employment had been mutually and freely agreed upon between the parties, then this will be the end of the matter. But if the Court finds otherwise, then it cannot in equity and good conscience give effect to a purported mutual agreement which was not genuinely consensual. Further, where the Court finds that the employee s volitional capacity had been 3

4 impaired at the time of executing the agreement, there can be no genuine consensus. The onus is on the Claimant to establish by cogent evidence that she accepted the VSS under duress. Mere allegations and insinuations are not enough. As regards the issue of termination, on 22 nd February 2001 the Claimant was directed to the IT meeting room, where she signed the VSS (CLE5), which brought her employment to an end on 28 th February By a letter dated 22 nd February 2001, (CLE5), the Company informed the Claimant that due to the restructuring of the Company s IT Department, the Claimant had become surplus to the Company s operational requirement. As such, the Claimant was given an opportunity to opt for the VSS scheme. She was also informed that if she accepted the offer, she would be paid termination benefits. The Claimant accepted the VSS by signing the acceptance form on the same day. At the same time, the Claimant also acknowledged the Company s confirmation of her acceptance of the VSS (CLE2), which stated that her last day of employment was on 28 th February Hence, with the this acceptance, the Claimant s employment was brought to an end on 28 th February The next issue is whether the Claimant s acceptance of the VSS was voluntary. The Claimant stated that in the IT room COW1 was present and he told her that her position had become redundant and that if she refused to accept the VSS Scheme, she would be terminated with no benefits. The Claimant stated that she was not allowed to leave the room and not given time to think about the offer. In 4

5 these circumstances, the Claimant put her signature on the VSS document (CLE5) the same day. Pursuant to the Claimant opting for VSS, she was paid compensation for loss of employment amounting to RM51,299/- and retirement benefits of RM28,518/-. She received a total sum of RM89,499/-. The Claimant contended she had been with the Company for 10 years and enjoyed numerous perks, as such there was no reason to bring her employment to an end. Further, she was earning a handsome salary of RM2,573/- per month. She was then 35 years of age and had a long way to go. If she had been given an option to stay she would have stood to earn a sum of (RM2,573 x 12 months x 20 years) RM617,520/- as opposed to the sum of RM89,499/- which was offered as compensation. After termination, the Claimant has not been able to obtain any permanent job till today and has expressed her desire to be reinstated. The Company in order to rebut the Claimant s contention that it was not voluntary called Amran Che Rose, the Employee Relations Manager (COW1). COW1 testified that the Claimant s position at the Helpdesk had become redundant. He stated that the Claimant was informed of the restructuring process and the offer of VSS. He did admit telling the Claimant that due to the outsourcing of the Helpdesk functions that she would be made redundant. As such, he had advised her to accept the VSS. He also admitted that the contract of service for an additional (3) months was only given to the Claimant, after she had accepted the VSS. 5

6 It is patently clear from the testimony of COW1, that the Claimant had no choice in matter. Either she accepted the VSS or be made redundant and lose the benefits offered. The Claimant was not given the option of remaining in employment, as her position no longer existed. This being the case, it cannot be said that Claimant s acceptance of the VSS was voluntary and there was a genuine consensus between the parties to bring the employment contract to end. This being the finding of the Court, it cannot give effect to said purported agreement. What this amounts to is that the employment was unilaterally terminated by the Company, which in effect was a dismissal. 4. Whether the dismissal is for just cause or excuse? The burden is now on the Company to produce cogent evidence to establish that the Claimant was dismissed for just cause or excuse. The Company had put forward the ground of redundancy to justify the dismissal. As regards the issue of redundancy, it is trite law that an employer has the right to reorganize his business for reasons of better economy and to retrench any employee thereby found to be redundant. This right of the employer is only limited by the rule that he act bona fide and fairly. The Company had established that several months prior to February 2001, it had planned a restructuring exercise, which resulted in the outsourcing of the noncore services. The first area to be outsourced was the on-site IT Engineering Support and subsequently it moved to the Helpdesk services and in late 2002, 6

7 the computer operations was also outsourced. Prior to the restructuring, the Helpdesk services were provided internally by the Company s own employees which included the Claimant. With the outsourcing, the Claimant s post became redundant. The reason for the outsourcing was that the Company wanted to obtain the services from a professional who had expertise in the particular area. With the outsourcing, the Company did not have to expend unnecessary time to resolve the problems anymore as it became the responsibility of the service provider. The outsourcing of the Company s non-core services was carried out in all Company s subsidiary companies throughout the world. This evidence produced by the Company has not been rebutted by the Claimant. The end result is that the Company has established that its decision to outsource the Claimant s function was made bona fide. But this is not the end of the matter, as the onus still lies on the Company to show that the consequent retrenchment was done fairly. This is due to section 20 of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 which requires the Court to consider whether the dismissal was with just cause or excuse (see Lim Siok Yean v. Pengkalen Securities Sdn. Bhd [2007] 3 ILR 624 at page 628). If there was a redundancy situation, in order for the Court to determine whether the consequent retrenchment was done fairly, it must ascertain whether the retrenchment was made in compliance with accepted standards of procedure. In respect of this issue, the Court has generally adopted the principles contained in the Agreed Industrial Relation Practices annexed to the Code of Conduct for 7

8 Industrial Harmony The authority for its reception is found in section 30(5A) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967, which states as follows:- In making its award, the Court may take into consideration any agreement or code relating to employment practices between organizations representative of employers and workmen respectively where such agreement or code has been approved by the Minister. The Court in East Asiatic Co v. Valen Yap (Award 130 of 1987) stated that:- It is important to bear in mind that the concern underlying the Agreed Industrial Relations Practices is that the management of the redundancy situation should be fair and just. In the instant case, the Claimant had joined the Company in 1990 and in 2001, the Company planned to outsource its Helpdesk services. The Company made the decision without consulting the Claimant. Although the Company did contend vaguely that the Claimant had been informed of her redundancy but the Claimant contended that she was only informed on 28 th February 2001, when she was called into the IT meeting room. The Company has not explained why it had failed to consult the Claimant, in spite of her faithful service to the Company. 8

9 There is also no evidence that the Company took any steps to retrain or transfer the Claimant to other departments. Further, no evidence was produced to show that the Claimant was alerted as to her redundancy as early as possible so that she look for alternative employment. The manner in which the redundancy exercise was done made the Claimant feel distressed and humiliated and as such when the contract term ended, the Claimant and her colleague (CLW2) left the office without saying goodbye. Be that as it may, the most important consideration is whether adequate redundancy and retirement benefits had been paid to the Claimant. This is because the payment would help the Claimant with her loss of means to earn an income. It is a way of balancing the competing interests of the employer to run a profitable business at its optimum level of economy and the Claimant s expectation to security of tenure, which makes for good industrial relations. In the instant case, the retrenchment arose out of outsourcing, which recognized the need for the services rendered by the Claimant, which was given to an independent contractor. The Claimant who had done nothing wrong, had now become the victim of the outsourcing. As such, the retrenchment benefits offered should be such as to make-up for this unfortunate state of affairs. In doing so, the Company should take into account the employability of the Claimant. In the instant case, the Claimant has not obtained any permanent employment, after her dismissal. At the time, the Claimant left the Company, she was 33 years of age and her last drawn salary was RM2,573/-. If she had remained in the 9

10 Company up to age 55, she stood to gain a sum of (RM2,573 x 12 month x 20 years) RM617,520/-. Instead, she was paid compensation of RM108,730/-, a paltry sum when compared to what she stood to gain, had she remained in service. The Company did not at any time contend that its financial position prevented it from making a better financial package. In conclusion, for the reasons given, it is the finding of the Court the retrenchment was not done fairly and consequently the dismissal is without just cause or excuse. 5. Remedy Compensation Reinstatement, in the present case, is not an appropriate remedy, as the Claimant s post no longer exist. As such, the Claimant is awarded compensation. In assessing compensation, the Court will award backwages for the period the Claimant was unemployed subject to a maximum of (24) months and compensation in lieu of reinstatement at the rate of one month s wages for each completed year of service. The Court will deduct the compensation of RM51,299 already paid to the Claimant, as equity and good conscience will not allow the Claimant to take double advantage. The other payments made to the Claimant were done in accordance with the terms of the employment contract and do not qualify as compensation. In the premises, the Court makes the following award:- 10

11 (i) Backwages RM2,573 x 24 months = RM61,752 (ii) Compensation in lieu of reinstatement The period is calculated from the date of commencement of employment (1 st April 1990) until last date of hearing (22 nd February 2008) which is (17) completed years. RM2,573x 17 months = RM42,741 RM105,493 Less compensation paid RM51,299 RM54,194 ======== 6. Order The Company shall pay the Claimant a sum of RM54,194 as compensation through her solicitors M/s Jerald Gomez & Associates within (14) days from the services of this award. HANDED DOWN AND DATED THIS 5 TH DAY OF APRIL 2008 (RAJENDRAN NAYAGAM) CHAIRMAN INDUSTRIAL COURT, MALAYSIA KUALA LUMPUR 11

Guide to Employment Tribunal Proceedings BallantyneGrant Solicitors the litigation specialists www.ballantynegrantllp.com INTRODUCTION This guide is the second in our series of articles explaining various

Employment Law in Bermuda Foreword This memorandum has been prepared for the assistance of those who are considering issues pertaining to employment law in Bermuda. It deals in broad terms with the requirements

COMPENSATION UPON TERMINATION OF APPOINTMENTS OF DIRECTORS AND SENIOR EXECUTIVES DIRECTORS ADVISORY SERVICE FACTSHEET These Guidance Notes provide an outline of the relevant provisions, but they are not

Unfair Dismissal Overview This module contains information on the new unfair dismissal laws and covers off the following matters: Definitions surrounding unfair dismissal The Small Business Fair Dismissal

Summary Outline of Mississippi Revised LLC Act (House Bill 683) In General The Revised Act is very friendly to small business but also supports freedom of contract principles. Existing LLCs that have written

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND GENERAL RELEASE There is no one size fits all. However, there are some general terms that are usually in the agreement. Payment Terms. Parties should agree on the amount if money

TERMINATION OF EMPLOYEES IN JAPAN: LEGAL CHALLENGES AND BEST PRACTICES Termination of regular employees is a difficult and unpredictable procedure under Japanese law and practice, and no amount of preparation

We are pleased to provide you with this brief overview of the issues and principles applicable in this area of the law. We hope you will find this information helpful. We welcome your comments and suggestions.

Summary of the law on UNFAIR DISMISSAL AND REDUNDANCY Workers are protected under the Employment Rights Act 1996 from being sacked or chosen unfairly for redundancy. This booklet provides a basic outline

9. A simple, fair dismissal system for small business A new, fair dismissal system has been introduced as part of the new workplace relations system. New dismissal laws took effect on 1 July 2009. Under

Civil Service Compensation Scheme Q&A December 2010 The new Civil Service Compensation Scheme (CSCS) which takes effect on 22 December 2010 sets out the level of compensation that Departments can pay their

This is an excerpt from Lawpack s book Employment Law Made Easy. To find out more about the employment law regulations and how they should be applied in the workplace, click here. Employment Law Made Easy

A summary of the law on: Unfair Dismissal and Redundancy Employees are protected under the Employment Rights (Northern Ireland) Order 1996 from being unfairly dismissed or chosen unfairly for redundancy.

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION BETWEEN: METROPOLITAN TORONTO POLICE SERVICES BOARD. (Hereinafter called the "Employer") - AND - METROPOLITAN TORONTO POLICE ASSOCIATION (Hereinaftkr called the "Association")

1 THE SOLICITORS (SCOTLAND) ACT 1980 THE SCOTTISH SOLICITORS DISCIPLINE TRIBUNAL F I N D I N G S in Complaint by THE COUNCIL OF THE LAW SOCIETY of SCOTLAND 26 Drumsheugh Gardens, Edinburgh against MS EILEEN

Employment law solicitors At Millbank solicitors we are dedicated to providing prompt and practical employment advice to both employers and employees. Our expert lawyers appreciate and understand the ever

In force as of 15 March 2005 based on decision by the President of NIB ARBITRATION REGULATIONS Contents I. SCOPE OF APPLICATION... 4 1 Purpose of these Regulations... 4 2 Applicability to different staff

Bankruptcy and Restructuring 121 BANKRUPTCY AND RESTRUCTURING Under Canadian constitutional law, the federal government has exclusive legislative control over bankruptcy and insolvency matters. Insolvency

INLAND REVENUE BOARD OF REVIEW DECISIONS IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG HIGH COURT Inland Revenue Appeal No. 1 of 1995 IN THE MA ITER of an Appeal by way of Case Stated pursuant to section 69 of the

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT This Settlement Agreement (Agreement) is entered into among the United States of America, acting through the United States Department of Justice and the United States Attorney s Office

w TOP 10 MYTHS OF EMPLOYMENT LAW As an Employment Lawyer I often come across employers who are ill informed about employment law. They frequently believe in a number of myths about the law which are either

TITLE 20 DISTRICT ATTORNEYS ARTICLE 1 District Attorneys PART 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS 20-1-101. Bond and oath of district attorney and staff. (1) Every district attorney, before entering upon the duties of

ARBITRATION RULES OF THE COURT OF ARBITRATION AT THE POLISH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE Chapter I Introductory provisions 1 Court of Arbitration 1. The Court of Arbitration at the Polish Chamber of Commerce (the

RESOLVING DISPUTES AT WORK: New procedures for discipline and grievances A GUIDE FOR EMPLOYEES This guide tells you about new rights and procedures you must follow if you have a grievance in work are facing

Unfair Dismissals Questions & Answers What is unfair dismissal? Unfair dismissal is where an employee claims that his or her employer s decision to terminate their employment was unfair. Unfair reasons

MEMORANDUM CONCERNING TRUSTEE OBJECTIONS TO CHAPTER 13 PLANS AT CONFIRMATION: How to Avoid and/or Resolve Such Objections The information as contained in this Memorandum is being provided as a courtesy

2014 Construction of Statute Definition of Injury (Causation) Revises Section 50-6-116, Construction of Chapter, to indicate that for dates of injury on or after July 1, 2014, the chapter should no longer

BEST PRACTICES STIPULATED SETTLEMENTS Pursuant to O.C.G.A. 34-9-15, the State Board of Workers Compensation is authorized to approve Stipulated Settlements. The parties to a claim may enter into a lump

Martin #2 IN THE MATTER OF THE ARBITRATION Between EMPLOYER and EMPLOYEE EMPLOYEE DISCHARGE REPORT AND DECISION OF ARBITRATOR In these proceedings, a single Grievance was submitted for an Award to James

PUBLIC SERVICE ACT 2005 An Act to make provision in respect of the public service of Lesotho and for related matters. Enacted by the Parliament of Lesotho Short title and commencement PART I - PRELIMINARY

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES If you are a subscriber of Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc. and you, or your dependent, have been diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder, you could receive

TEACHERS' TENURE Act 4 of 1937 (Ex. Sess.) AN ACT relative to continuing tenure of office of certificated teachers in public educational institutions; to provide for probationary periods; to regulate discharges

IN THE MATTER OF THE INSURANCE ACT, R.S.O. 1990 c. I.8, as amended AND IN THE MATTER OF THE ARBITRATION ACT, S.O. 1991, c.17, as amended BETWEEN: AND IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION WAWANESA MUTUAL INSURANCE

Question 1 Who is entitled to bonus under the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965? Does this Act prescribe any disqualifications also for claiming bonus? Explain. (May, 2002 & 2004) Every employee of an establishment

Thinking the unthinkable TUPE Redundancy Restructuring Mark Makin Acas Senior Adviser Aims and objectives of today By the end of this session we will: provide an overview of the Transfer of Undertakings

LAWS OF MALAYSIA REPRINT Act 258 TRUSTEES (INCORPORATION) ACT 1952 Incorporating all amendments up to 1 January 2006 PUBLISHED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF LAW REVISION, MALAYSIA UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE REVISION

December 23, 1996 COMPENSATION AND THE DEATH OF A WORKER A BRIEFING PAPER ISSUE This briefing paper concerns Section 17 of the Workers Compensation Act and associated provisions in Sections 18, 19, and

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF PHYSICS AND JEFF SCHMIDT THIS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ( Agreement ) is made and entered into as of February 20, 2006, by and between the American Institute

General Employment Issues Common to Transportation Companies Presented by Michael Aasen, Partner McLennan Ross LLP October 2, 2014 What is it? Terms which govern the relationship between an employer and

BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR In the Matter of the Arbitration of a Dispute Between TEAMSTERS GENERAL UNION LOCAL 662 and MARSHFIELD ELECTRIC AND WATER DEPARTMENT Case 157 No. 63946 (Eiden Grievance) Appearances:

SEPARATION AGREEMENT AND GENERAL RELEASE This Separation Agreement and General Release ( this Agreement ) is made and entered into by and between ( Employee ) and ( the Agency ) (collectively, the Parties

LEGAL UPDATES AND FACTSHEETS TRANSFER OF UNDERTAKINGS (TUPE) PREFACE: TUPE 1981: This factsheet looks at the law surrounding the transfer of undertakings, established by The Transfer of Undertakings (Protection

BRITISH VIRGIN ISLANDS CIVIL APPEAL NO.10 OF 2002 BETWEEN: IN THE COURT OF APPEAL SPARKASSE BREGENZ BANK AG and In The Matter of ASSOCIATED CAPITAL CORPORATION Appellant Respondent Before: His Lordship,

456 Singapore Academy of Law Journal (1998) THE MOTOR INSURERS BUREAU OF SINGAPORE WHAT IS AN MIB AND WHAT IS ITS ROLE? To appreciate this it will be useful to take a look at the first Motor Insurers Bureau

LEGAL AID ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I Establishment of Legal Aid Council 1. Legal Aid Council. 2. Membership of the Council, etc. 3. Director-General of Legal Aid and other staff of the Council.

Summary of the law on DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION This booklet sets out the basic employment rights to which workers are entitled under the age discrimination provisions of the Equality Act 2010. These apply

Being a witness in the High Court and County Courts Ex 341- w3 I have been asked to be a witness - what do I do? Why have I been asked to be a witness? You have been asked to be a witness because you have

Guidelines for Employees, Employers and Practitioners appearing before the Employment Appeals Tribunal This is a guideline only and, as such, does not purport to give a full and comprehensive description

Conditional Fee Agreement: What You Need to Know This document forms an important part of your agreement with us. Please read it carefully. Definitions of words used in this document and the accompanying